| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Meridius
   |
Posted - 2005.02.02 08:03:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Meridius on 02/02/2005 08:06:13
Here is the problem.
Tech2 mwd is now as difficult to fit as a Gistii mwd, you know, the crazy one that gives 660% speed bonus.
Now, when i first heard about this i was quite ****ed off. I placed an order in the trade forum to buy domination mwds. Expensive of course but at least it was a solution to this mindless retarded nerf.
Unfortunately, that won't work either. Domination mwd requires 18pg just as gistii and tech 2. It's tech 1 but it requires tech 2 fittings. Something that doesn't exist with other named items like weapons/repairers whatever.
So in addition to tech2 being nerfed, domination/faction have as well.So basically, we have to use tech1 crap mwd that give 525% speed for 525% sig radius vs mwd II we spent 4mil a piece on that gives 550% speed for 500% sig radius.
Why don't you guys fix something that people complain about rather then muck up setups people have tweaked for months? Not to mention millions apon millions of isk spent on now useless faction items.
If you think this is a whine, whatever. If these changes were an issue and the people wanted it, ok. Thats not the case, it's just a pointless waste of time change that makes no sense at all.
I'm not even going to get into the advantage this gives certain less powergrid hungry interceptors compared to other interceptors who rely on speed to live.
________________________________________________________
|
Tyrrax Thorrk
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 08:06:00 -
[2]
Yay for crappy stealth changes that only serve to make things worse!
Not as if there's anything else devs could be spending their time on.
|
lollerskates
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 08:08:00 -
[3]
Was this change supposed to be implemented (even if by stealth), or did somebody screw up and do it accidentally?
|
Leyla Anshley
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 08:17:00 -
[4]
them question is: why we trained so hard to use tech2 and why tech2 was out if we can't use proper tech2 setup for our ships? mwd nerf is not so evil for cruisers or battleships, but it hurts for interceptors. 
|
Uuve Savisaalo
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 08:27:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Uuve Savisaalo on 02/02/2005 08:38:02
There is also the tremendous negative impact to the balance and economy of frigate-class microwarp drives.
In the past, tech1 meta microwarp drives offered vanilla bonuses, with several million for the catalyzed cold gas.
The techII microwarp drive offered somewhat better bonus at the cost of higher skill requirements and certain increased CPU demand (significant matter of concern as any interceptor pilot would tell you)
Here is where things diverged in two directions of exuberance - the 'gallente navy/true sansha, etc..' faction 1-mn microwarp drives offered essentially the benefit of tech II, minus the skill requirements and sometimes lower per-cycle cap consumption. The gistii 1-mn had the 18 grid, but it offered nearly 150% higher output than arcjet, and therefore was worth the extra trouble. Lastly, the domination/minmatar navy was viewed as the holy grail and sold for over 100 million percisely because it combined excellent boost - 575% base - with 12 grid, well below even the tech1.
Whilst the efforts of CCP are in most ways laudable where the matters of this latest patch are concerned, the 'rebalancing' of microwarp drive requirements disrupted a rather logical progression structure of 1mn MWDs in terms of power, price and availability.
|
Shadowsword
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 08:31:00 -
[6]
Well, it would be normal that T2 MWD use more grid than T1, but interceptors are T2 ships (supposed to fit T2 stuff without much trouble), and yet you can't have, for example, a Crusader with T2 dual light pulses and T2 MWD. I think this change is fine IF some interceptors get their grid boosted by 2-3 to accomodate that change.
|
Altai Saker
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 09:27:00 -
[7]
Fix it plz, everyone above has made the case... either increase certain ceptors powergrid by 3 or just.... reduce the needed pg of mwd 2
|
Hellek
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 09:45:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Hellek on 02/02/2005 09:45:25
I don't think that interceptors are meant to fit the biggest frigate-class guns in all their slots. They are meant to be tacklers. The damage-dealing is clearly the job of the assault frigates. So if you can't fit your MWD II, then fit smaller guns.
PS: Other faction loot also has and always had the fitting requirements of T2. There is nothing wrong about that.
|
Arud
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 09:54:00 -
[9]
CHANGE YOUR FIT!
it shouldnt be hard, at least easier than *****ing on the forums
|
Waagaa Ktlehr
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 09:55:00 -
[10]
 Originally by: Hellek
Edited by: Hellek on 02/02/2005 09:45:25
I don't think that interceptors are meant to fit the biggest frigate-class guns in all their slots. They are meant to be tacklers. The damage-dealing is clearly the job of the assault frigates. So if you can't fit your MWD II, then fit smaller guns.
PS: Other faction loot also has and always had the fitting requirements of T2. There is nothing wrong about that.
Dual Light pulse lasers are definitly not biggest frigate-class guns dear sir :)
Somehow I was able to still setup my crusader with a warp dis, mwd II and 4x DLPL2, don't dare to unfit it though :)
------------------------------------------
I am a love machine, feeding my fantasy, give me a kiss or three, have fun!
|
fras
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 10:12:00 -
[11]
I have to agree with Hellek and Arud, just change your fit. It was to be expected that these were brought into line the same as other T2 propulsion & T2 guns use more grid.
Also a crusader can fit 4x dual light pulse II and a T2 mwd with grid to spare.
I do agree it's unfair faction items should have the grid boost though.
Has anyone checked the sig penalty of T1 item? It's listed as 500 same as T2 on eve-i(which has the grid boost listed so I suspect all numbers are correct).
|
Lallante
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 10:21:00 -
[12]
TECH 2 MWDS pere-patch HAD NO EXTRA GRID REQUIREMENTS OVER TECH 1
Of COURSE they were going to be nerfed sooner or later! The only people complaining are those who want to be able to fit exactly the same setup without having to think about a new one!
Crows are what is unbalanced now, not MWDs.
Lall - THE Vocal Minority -
ShinRa
|
Grimpak
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 10:27:00 -
[13]
Edited by: Grimpak on 02/02/2005 10:27:42
hmm.. playing devil's advocate here but... if T2 guns are harder to fit than T1.. why shouldn't that apply to the rest of T2?
-------------------
Quote:
Fragm's Oversized Ego Cannon barely scratches the forums, inflicting omgnoonecares damage
|
Trey Azagthoth
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 10:41:00 -
[14]
Hell, I fit my Gistii A-Type on my Malediction np, even with a full load of turrets, cloaking device, warp scrambler and webber, I can fit all cap power relays in the low slots. Hmm, lets hear it for Engineering and Electronics lvl 5.
Vin Diesel claims he has never hailed a taxi. He just runs up to them at stop lights, opens the door, shoves the current passenger over, and tells the cab driver what his new destination is. |
Bobbeh
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 11:03:00 -
[15]
Mer, just change the med pulse to another dual light, i know it sucks and yes im using catalyzed cold gas to be able to fit everything.
Mimiru > It'd be a tie, the monkies nerfed pooflinger wouldnt have enough tracking to hit the parrot orbiting him, but the parrot's beak is so small it couldnt break the monkey's fur tanking. |
Kaeten
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 11:40:00 -
[16]
I've got 3 words... LIVE WITH IT
___________________________________
Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante
Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante
Gallante Gallante Gallante Gallante |
Vampire Blade
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 11:57:00 -
[17]
returns on a tech 2 mwd compared to a meta tech 1: 25% more speed, 25% less signature radius.
the cost of this?
increased powergrid, increase cpu use, increased cap use, double the cost.
let's hear it for the benefits of IMPROVED TECHNOLOGY!
----- ----- -----
|
H Zub
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 12:19:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Lallante
TECH 2 MWDS pere-patch HAD NO EXTRA GRID REQUIREMENTS OVER TECH 1
Of COURSE they were going to be nerfed sooner or later! The only people complaining are those who want to be able to fit exactly the same setup without having to think about a new one!
Crows are what is unbalanced now, not MWDs.
Bare in mind that the tech II stuff for missiles aint out yet. When we can equip tech II launchers, missiles and mods I am sure the fitting reqs will be higher for those. So in short, the crow in NOT unbalanced other than it needs the tech II missile stuff as well.
Captain Morgan Society
Me parrot
Movie |
lythos miralbar
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 12:25:00 -
[19]
This is just my opinion, and alot of people wont like it but im gonna say it anyway.. 
Intys and destroyers are meant for one thing.. destroying tech 1 frigates very quickly.
This is something they do EXTREMELY well (intys are even better at it than destroyers).
Due to thier high speed, manoverability and low sig radius intys are also good at getting close to bigger ships and tackling them without getting splatted (tackling ravens and scorps not included), thus holding them untill support shows up.
They are not meant to take on cruisers and bigger, although because they are already overpowered they can. People have now got used to the fact that they can do this and wrongly think that thier role is to intercept and destroy ANYTHING.
This nerf is just the latest one aimed at putting intys back into the role in which they belong.. tacking and destroying tech one frigates and other small targets, and holding bigger ships till support arrives.
Intys are not > all..
If you fly and inty, you'd better get used to nerfs, cos I bet all my isk there are more coming..
|
fras
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 12:26:00 -
[20]
I've just checked in game, sig penalties go as follows:
T1 vanilla - 500%
T2 - 500%
phased mono - 512%
catalized - 525%
That's not right surely? I'm crap at maths but it seems pretty pointless buying named T1 items.
Maybe it's always been like that and I've just not noticed.
|
Toran Mehtar
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 12:47:00 -
[21]
Originally by: fras
I've just checked in game, sig penalties go as follows:
T1 vanilla - 500%
T2 - 500%
phased mono - 512%
catalized - 525%
That's not right surely? I'm crap at maths but it seems pretty pointless buying named T1 items.
Maybe it's always been like that and I've just not noticed.
That's why everybody was using tech II, and most likely a factor in why tech II got nerfed. There was no reason to ever use named over tech II.
Still a sucky stealth nerf though
|
Crux Australis
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 13:44:00 -
[22]
Well I can live with new grid requirements.
But why do T2 ABs and MWDs now REQUIRE MORE CAP to be activated?
How does this fit in the picture of a T2 (better) technology?
|
Crux Australis
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 13:46:00 -
[23]
Oh yes, while I am at it: STOP THE ******* STEALTH NERFING OF STUFF FFS !
|
TomB
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 14:41:00 -
[24]
incorrect power requirement for the tech2 abs & mwds has been fixed, coming in next big patch, could get in sooner
thanks
2004.07.06 19:30:45combatTomB strikes you critically with his Nerf Bat, pwning you for -100% everything. |
Vampire Blade
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 14:52:00 -
[25]
Originally by: TomB
incorrect power requirement for the tech2 abs & mwds has been fixed, coming in next big patch, could get in sooner
thanks
TomB you vague devil! what does this mean! elaborate, quickly!
pretty please B)
----- ----- -----
|
Bad'Boy
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:02:00 -
[26]
Originally by: TomB
incorrect power requirement for the tech2 abs & mwds has been fixed, coming in next big patch, could get in sooner
thanks
any1 got from jove to english translator?
B.A.D.B.O.Y.: Biomechanical Android Designed for Battle and Online Yelling
"Bad Boys,Bad Boys, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when WE come for yoU"
|
Arud
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:03:00 -
[27]
Originally by: TomB
incorrect power requirement for the tech2 abs & mwds has been fixed, coming in next big patch, could get in sooner
thanks
erm... I dont get it if it has been fixed on tranq or has been fixed on sissy oor..... ermm... I dont get it
|
Ithildin
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:18:00 -
[28]
My translator tell me: I've read this and something's wrong, I'll fix it don't worry.
Piece of .... I think the translator is as vague as TomB.
Oh well, in the meanwhile I'll be patient and work with what I got. That is a fast ship, scrambler, and some friends that do more damage than I would in either case.
--
If TC causes you discomfort that you feel is unwarranted or may be outside TC's current contract - contact me, please. |
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:21:00 -
[29]
hmm... I translated it into "the change was unintentional and will be reverted", but it could also mean a number of other things.
|
TomB
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:31:00 -
[30]
suposed to be 10% power need increase instead of 20%
cheap jovian translator
2004.07.06 19:30:45combatTomB strikes you critically with his Nerf Bat, pwning you for -100% everything. |
Crux Australis
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:45:00 -
[31]
Originally by: TomB
suposed to be 10% power need increase instead of 20%
cheap jovian translator
K.
What about the stealth (I won't ever clarify enough how much I hate you guys doing this) increase of the cap usage in T2 ABs and MWDs?
Was it intended as well?
If yes, why?
|
Bad'Boy
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:47:00 -
[32]
Originally by: Crux Australis
Originally by: TomB
suposed to be 10% power need increase instead of 20%
cheap jovian translator
K.
What about the stealth (I won't ever clarify enough how much I hate you guys doing this) increase of the cap usage in T2 ABs and MWDs?
Was it intended as well?
If yes, why?
cap usage increase was in patch notes
B.A.D.B.O.Y.: Biomechanical Android Designed for Battle and Online Yelling
"Bad Boys,Bad Boys, what you gonna do, what you gonna do when WE come for yoU"
|
Crux Australis
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 15:54:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Bad'Boy
Originally by: Crux Australis
Originally by: TomB
suposed to be 10% power need increase instead of 20%
cheap jovian translator
K.
What about the stealth (I won't ever clarify enough how much I hate you guys doing this) increase of the cap usage in T2 ABs and MWDs?
Was it intended as well?
If yes, why?
cap usage increase was in patch notes
I read the patch notes and did not see it.
I'll just stfu, crawl back in my hole and end myself in the most painless way then.
|
Maya Rkell
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 16:01:00 -
[34]
Originally by: TomB
incorrect power requirement for the tech2 abs & mwds has been fixed, coming in next big patch, could get in sooner
thanks
As a note...
This change wouldn't be an issue for me at least if there was a greater avaliability of named Micro Aux Power cores, or the T2 ones. T2 capacitor power relays would be nice too..
"As far as I can tell, It doesn't matter who you are, If you can believe there's something worth fighting for " - Garbage, "Parade" |
Sheraad
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 16:44:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Toran Mehtar
Originally by: fras
I've just checked in game, sig penalties go as follows:
T1 vanilla - 500%
T2 - 500%
phased mono - 512%
catalized - 525%
That's not right surely? I'm crap at maths but it seems pretty pointless buying named T1 items.
Maybe it's always been like that and I've just not noticed.
It's madness. Of course there's no real point buying named tech1 items over tech2 items. That's the whole goddamn point of tech2 items; they are harder to use and much more expensive, but can be reliably manufactured in a lot of cases and offer uncompromisingly superior stats.
For christ's sake, this hurts so many interceptors. And on the subject of interceptors fitting the heaviest frigate guns... NONE DO without fitting an MAPC. On a crusader with engineering V I fit a MAPC and only one medium pulse 2, 3 dual light pulse 2's, in order to fit the new T2 mwds. before i could use two medium pulse 2's. It's not much of a big deal but it's a totally unnecessary nerf. MWDs already had enough penalties, you don't have to pull an invulnerability field on them and make them un*****ble too...
sigh.
That's why everybody was using tech II, and most likely a factor in why tech II got nerfed. There was no reason to ever use named over tech II.
Still a sucky stealth nerf though
|
Arud
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 16:58:00 -
[36]
Originally by: TomB
suposed to be 10% power need increase instead of 20%
cheap jovian translator
ah thanks for tha clarification
|
Scorpyn
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 17:20:00 -
[37]
Originally by: TomB
suposed to be 10% power need increase instead of 20%
From the patch notes : Tech II Afterburner/MWD capacitor needs changed to 10% more than Tech 1
It appears that both capacitor usage and power grid requirements have been increased, but still only the capacitor usage is listed in the patch notes (as far as I can tell). Is the power grid usage increase intentional?
|
Percivs
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 17:26:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Scorpyn
Originally by: TomB
suposed to be 10% power need increase instead of 20%
From the patch notes : Tech II Afterburner/MWD capacitor needs changed to 10% more than Tech 1
It appears that both capacitor usage and power grid requirements have been increased, but still only the capacitor usage is listed in the patch notes (as far as I can tell). Is the power grid usage increase intentional?
Signed. Initial patch notes are very clear that the change was capacitor. No power grid changes were indicated.
Please clarify.
Additionally, other TL2 gear got a PG hike as well. This was not listed in the patch notes either.
---
"All of us who are concerned for peace and triumph of reason and justice must be keenly aware how small an influence reason and honest good will exert upon events in the political field" - A.E. |
Tyrrax Thorrk
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 17:35:00 -
[39]
I'm fine with the changes to tech 2 mwds and abs..
But why ruin minmatar navy mwd and domination mwd ?? Just serves to make them worthless, used to be fun being able to choose different sig ratio/speeds and prices, have a little more variability in it...
Changes to what they were just seems totally pointless except to make the game worse.
|
Bobbeh
|
Posted - 2005.02.02 18:00:00 -
[40]
Why did we get an increase, i didnt realize all tech II equipment got a pg increase. I did not hear anyone complaining about this.
The problem is that frigate MWD's already use more grid proportionally with other sized vessels, if anything we should decrease the amount used on tech I.
Lets take this in comparison. (im guessing numbers)
Standard Tech I Frigate = 35 powergrid with skills
Standard 1mn MWD = 15 powergrid
Standard Tech I Cruiser = 550 powergrid with skills
Standard 10mn MWD = 150 powergrid
Standard Tech I battleship = 16000 powergrid with skills
Standard 100mn MWD = 1250
I realize that cruisers and battleships have more slots so would need more grid proportionally. However, modules such as warp disruptors and damage modifiers arent size specific so they use significantly more of the grid on a frigate then on a cruiser or BS.
Im used to have 50/50 grid on my claw, i had to spend 20mil on a module that uses no grid so i could fit it all. Two days later its worthless.
Mimiru > It'd be a tie, the monkies nerfed pooflinger wouldnt have enough tracking to hit the parrot orbiting him, but the parrot's beak is so small it couldnt break the monkey's fur tanking. |
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |